Case Law United States v. Coles

United States v. Coles

Document Cited Authorities (55) Cited in (17) Related

William A. Behe, U.S. Attorney's Office, Harrisburg, PA, for United States of America.

Thomas A. Thornton, Federal Public Defender, Harrisburg, PA, for Defendants.

MEMORANDUM

Christopher C. Conner, United States District Judge In accordance with the court's July 16, 2020 pretrial and trial scheduling order, defendants in the above-captioned action have filed their first-tier pretrial motions. Their requests number more than two dozen and seek relief ranging from discovery and disclosures of certain evidence, to dismissal of counts and perceived surplusage from the third superseding indictment, to severance of defendants and counts for trial. This memorandum addresses defendants’ discovery-related motions.

I. Factual Background & Procedural History

A grand jury sitting in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, returned a five-count indictment in August 2016 charging defendants Kevin Coles and Devin Dickerson with various drug-trafficking and firearms offenses. The grand jury has since returned three superseding indictments. The first, returned April 12, 2018, added a sixth charge against Coles and Dickerson. The grand jury then returned a second superseding indictment on December 20, 2018, adding 16 counts, including several capital charges, and nine new defendants: Torey White, Christopher Johnson, Jerell Adgebesan, Kenyatta Corbett, Michael Buck, Nicholas Preddy, Johnnie Jenkins-Armstrong, Terrance Lawson, and Tyrone Armstrong. We promptly assigned learned capital counsel to each death-penalty-eligible defendant (Coles, Dickerson, White, Johnson, Adgebesan, Corbett, Buck, and Jenkins-Armstrong) in accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 3005.

We convened a telephonic conference on March 15, 2019, to discuss pretrial scheduling. We appointed a coordinating discovery attorney at defendants’ request, set a discovery deadline, and established February 3, 2020, as the government's deadline to provide notice of intent to seek the death penalty pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3593(a). We later imposed a status-report requirement, tasking the government to file reports at 45-day intervals concerning, inter alia , the status of discovery and whether the government had made an initial decision not to seek the death penalty as to any eligible defendant.

The grand jury returned a third superseding indictment on January 29, 2020. That indictment, inter alia , added a new capital charge against the death-penalty-eligible defendants, (see Doc. 499 at 24); added a new noncapital charge against those defendants and Preddy, (id. at 18-19); and added Preddy to all new and existing capital counts, making him death-penalty-eligible for the first time, (id. at 12-17, 20-23). The third superseding indictment charges defendants in 22 counts, as follows1 :

• Count One: conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a) and Pinkerton v. United States, 328 U.S. 640, 66 S.Ct. 1180, 90 L.Ed. 1489 (1946), against Coles, Dickerson, White, Adgebesan, Corbett, Preddy, and Jenkins-Armstrong;
• Count Two: Hobbs Act robbery, and aiding and abetting same, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a) and 18 U.S.C. § 2, against Coles, Dickerson, White, Adgebesan, Corbett, Preddy, and Jenkins-Armstrong;
• Counts Three, Four, and Five: using, brandishing, and discharging a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence (Hobbs Act robbery and killing a witness) resulting in the deaths of Phillip Jackson, Brandon Cole, and Wendy Chaney,2 respectively, and aiding and abetting same, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) and (j) and 18 U.S.C. § 2, against Coles, Dickerson, White, Adgebesan, Corbett, Preddy, and Jenkins-Armstrong;
• Count Six: conspiracy to use, brandish, and discharge a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence (Hobbs Act robbery and killing a witness) resulting in the death of Chaney, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), (j), and (o), against Coles, Dickerson, White, Adgebesan, Corbett, Preddy, and Jenkins-Armstrong;
• Count Seven: conspiracy to commit murder for hire in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1958 and Pinkerton, against Coles, Dickerson, White, Adgebesan, Corbett, Preddy, and Jenkins-Armstrong;
• Counts Eight, Nine, and Ten: murder of witnesses (Chaney, Jackson, and Cole, respectively), and aiding and abetting same, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(a)(1)(C) and 18 U.S.C. § 2, against Coles, Dickerson, White, Adgebesan, Corbett, Preddy, and Jenkins-Armstrong;
• Count Eleven: conspiracy to murder witnesses (Chaney, Jackson, and Cole) in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(k), against Coles, Dickerson, White, Adgebesan, Corbett, Preddy, and Jenkins-Armstrong;
• Count Twelve: conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute 1,000 grams and more of a mixture and substance containing a detectable amount of heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846, against Corbett and Adgebesan;
• Count Thirteen: possession with intent to distribute heroin, and aiding and abetting same, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 2, against Corbett and Adgebesan;
• Count Fourteen: conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute at least 100 grams of a mixture and substance containing a detectable amount of heroin, and at least 28 grams of a mixture and substance containing a detectable amount of cocaine base and cocaine HCL, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846, against Coles and Dickerson;
• Counts Fifteen and Sixteen: possession with intent to distribute a mixture and substance containing a detectable amount of heroin, and a mixture and substance containing a detectable amount of both cocaine HCL and cocaine base, and aiding and abetting same, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 2, against Coles and Dickerson, respectively; • Count Seventeen: possession with intent to distribute a mixture and substance containing a detectable amount of heroin and a mixture and substance containing a detectable amount of cocaine base, and aiding and abetting same, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 2, against Coles and Dickerson;
• Count Eighteen: distribution of a mixture and substance containing a detectable amount of heroin resulting in serious bodily injury, and aiding and abetting same, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(C) and 18 U.S.C. § 2, against Coles and Dickerson;
• Count Nineteen: possession of firearms in furtherance of a drug-trafficking crime as alleged in Counts Fourteen through Eighteen, and aiding and abetting same, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1), 18 U.S.C. § 2, and Pinkerton, against Coles and Dickerson;
• Count Twenty: conspiracy to murder a witness (codefendant Adgebesan) in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(k), against Preddy, Jenkins-Armstrong, Lawson, and Armstrong;
• Count Twenty-One: attempted murder of a witness (codefendant Adgebesan) in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(a)(1)(A) and (C), against Preddy, Jenkins-Armstrong, Lawson, and Armstrong; and
• Count Twenty-Two: accessory after the fact with respect to Hobbs Act robbery and murder, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 3, against Lawson and Armstrong.

(See Doc. 499 at 8-41). We appointed learned counsel for Preddy shortly after the third superseding indictment was returned.

On June 4, 2020, following two concurred-in extensions of its Section 3593(a) deadline, the government notified defendants and the court that it would not seek the death penalty as to any eligible defendant. We held a telephonic conference on June 22, 2020, to discuss pretrial and trial scheduling and the propriety of retaining learned counsel given the government's election. After hearing from counsel, we issued a memorandum and order authorizing the formerly death-penalty-eligible defendants to continue with two attorneys. We then entered a pretrial and trial scheduling order which established four tiers of pretrial motions: non-fact-based motions (to sever, to dismiss, for bill of particulars, and concerning discovery), due October 23, 2020; fact-based and suppression motions, due January 11, 2021; expert motions, due August 2, 2021; and motions in limine , due November 5, 2021. That order also established an August 2, 2021 deadline for the parties to provide notice of their experts and adopted the government's proposal for a November 5, 2021 early-disclosure date for its Jencks Act material.

Defendants have now filed 19 individual and omnibus first-tier motions. (See Docs. 586, 588, 590, 592, 652, 660, 662, 664, 666, 668, 670, 672, 673, 676, 679, 679-3, 680, 683, 685). After several extensions of briefing deadlines at the government's request, defendants’ first-tier motions became ripe for disposition on January 4, 2021. This memorandum addresses defendants’ discovery-related motions. A separate memorandum will follow, taking up defendants’ remaining motions.

II. Discussion

We will summarize the pending motions, delineate the standards by which they must be adjudged, and then address the issues presented therein. Defendantsdiscovery motions run the gamut from demands for disclosure of exculpatory evidence to requests for the identification of witnesses. Coles, White, Adgebesan, and Preddy move to compel disclosure of long lists of material believed to be in the government's possession. They also seek immediate production of any exculpatory and impeachment material the government may have. Coles, White, and Preddy ask us to order the government to identify its jailhouse-informant witnesses, and Preddy further requests a court order directing the government to identify all of its witnesses in advance of trial. Dickerson's lone request is for modification of the existing protective order.3

A. Discovery in a Criminal Case

We begin with an overview of the...

5 cases
Document | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Pennsylvania – 2022
United States v. Parfaite
"..."
Document | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Pennsylvania – 2022
United States v. Nickas
"..."
Document | U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey – 2024
United States v. Rabbitt
"...and inspection, especially when the Government has already turned over Jencks materials. See Fed. R. Crim. R 16(a)(1)(E);[12] Coles, 511 F.Supp.3d at 574 (stating only that “the rule exempts government product. . . . [and] the statements of prospective government witnesses, except as provid..."
Document | U.S. District Court — Western District of Pennsylvania – 2022
United States v. Perla
"...it is clear that “the government must disclose explicit cooperation agreements or immunity deals inked by prosecutor and witness.” Coles, 511 F.Supp.3d at 583 (citing 405 U.S. at 151-54). Furthermore, “[t]he Confrontation Clause guarantees a criminal defendant the right to ‘be confronted wi..."
Document | U.S. District Court — Western District of Pennsylvania – 2024
United States v. Anderson
"...Brady, since “inadmissible evidence may be material if it could ... [lead] to the discovery of admissible evidence.”.... 511 F.Supp.3d 566, 574-76 (M.D. Pa. 2021) (cleaned up). the foregoing principles in mind, the Court makes the following rulings relative to Anderson's various discovery r..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Experience vLex's unparalleled legal AI

Access millions of documents and let Vincent AI power your research, drafting, and document analysis — all in one platform.

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
5 cases
Document | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Pennsylvania – 2022
United States v. Parfaite
"..."
Document | U.S. District Court — Middle District of Pennsylvania – 2022
United States v. Nickas
"..."
Document | U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey – 2024
United States v. Rabbitt
"...and inspection, especially when the Government has already turned over Jencks materials. See Fed. R. Crim. R 16(a)(1)(E);[12] Coles, 511 F.Supp.3d at 574 (stating only that “the rule exempts government product. . . . [and] the statements of prospective government witnesses, except as provid..."
Document | U.S. District Court — Western District of Pennsylvania – 2022
United States v. Perla
"...it is clear that “the government must disclose explicit cooperation agreements or immunity deals inked by prosecutor and witness.” Coles, 511 F.Supp.3d at 583 (citing 405 U.S. at 151-54). Furthermore, “[t]he Confrontation Clause guarantees a criminal defendant the right to ‘be confronted wi..."
Document | U.S. District Court — Western District of Pennsylvania – 2024
United States v. Anderson
"...Brady, since “inadmissible evidence may be material if it could ... [lead] to the discovery of admissible evidence.”.... 511 F.Supp.3d 566, 574-76 (M.D. Pa. 2021) (cleaned up). the foregoing principles in mind, the Court makes the following rulings relative to Anderson's various discovery r..."

Try vLex and Vincent AI for free

Start a free trial

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your 3-day Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex